Strong,
credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a
government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense,
other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends
heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition
party.

1.Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.

2.Wax indignant. This is also known as the "how dare you?"
gambit.

3.Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet,
"wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is
still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through
"rumors."

4.Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspect of the
weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild
rumors and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges,
real and fanciful alike.

5.Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist,"
"nut," "ranter," "kook,"
"crackpot," and of course, "rumor monger." You must
then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have
thus maligned.

6.Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting
strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply
pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money.

7.Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition
can be very useful.

8.Dismiss the charges as "old news."

9.Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and
avoidance" or "taking the limited hang-out route." This
way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only
to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This
stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite
different from the one originally taken.

10.Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as
ultimately unknowable.

11.Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With
thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. For
example: We have a completely free press. If they know of evidence that
the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior knowledge of
the

Oklahoma
City bombing they would have reported it. They haven't reported it, so
there was no prior knowledge by the BATF. Another variation on this theme
involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press that would
report it.

12.Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely.

13.Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or
reporting a distraction.